The Rare Promise of Thorium Reactors

If you want to design a new automobile, there are choices, but there are also parameters. For example, you would be advised to start with four wheels on the ground. You could design it with three, but the trade-offs are considerable.

When it comes to designing a new nuclear reactor for generating electricity, there are no such absolutes. A nuclear reactor only needs a safe nuclear reaction and the ability to harness the resulting heat. That means that nuclear reactors can be configured in all kinds of ways with considerable variety in the design of the fuel, the size of the reactor, the cooling system and the moderator (usually water).

Not only can the configuration of the fuel vary with differing results, but the fuel also can vary. It can be, for example, the intriguing metal thorium, which is plentiful in nature. It is fertile but not fissile, which means it takes uranium or plutonium to get a nuclear reaction going. When that happens, a thorium reactor appears to have advantages, from the availability of the fuel to the safety of the reactor.

Yet most of the world’s commercial civilian reactors – more than 400 — have just one basic design: uranium-fueled light water. The moderator is water.

Adm. Hyman G. Rickover, the father of the nuclear Navy, favored this technology. Recognizing that left to their own devices, nuclear engineers would come up with dozens of reactors, and would stymie the effort get industry off the ground, Rickover pushed light water. The admiral was a man who got what he wanted. So the light water reactor (LWR) became the world standard with some national exceptions.

Canada developed a very successful reactor that uses natural uranium, but requires heavy water: water with an extra hydrogen atom. Britain built two different reactor designs, the Magnox and the Advanced Gas Reactor, but finally has come around to the light water reactor. The Soviet Union went ahead with its own designs, including the disastrous Chernobyl design.

Although LWR construction steams ahead in China, and more hesitatingly elsewhere, there is a sense that it is time for change. Time to look at other designs and fuels.

In the United States, the Department of Energy has stimulated interest in a new generation of small modular reactorsand some ideas, which got pushed aside by light water technology, are doggedly holding on and even fighting back. Among these are various gas reactor concepts and fast reactors, where the neutron flux is not slowed down and which can do amazing things, including burning a certain proportion of nuclear waste.

The molten salt thorium reactor continues to have its advocates, although this technology is not included in DOE’s small modular reactor program. It is not a new idea, but it is one that has been given short shrift from the nuclear establishment in recent years. Promising work on it was done at the Oak Ridge National Laboratory in Tennessee in the 1960s, under the legendary scientist and laboratory director Alvin Weinberg. He died in 2006, and I was lucky to have known him.

When I attended the Thorium Energy Alliance annual conference, held in Palo Alto, Calif., this year, I felt I had stumbled into an old-fashioned revival meeting. They are believers. Work on thorium-fueled reactors is ongoing in China, India and Russia.

But the best hope for thorium future may not lie in the nuclear sphere at all. It may rest with rare earths, and the global appetite for these in a high-tech world. A simple way to understand rare earths is that in technology they are great multipliers, making products in consumer electronics, computers and networks, communications, electricity generation, health care, advanced transportation, and across a wide range of defense materiel, more effective. With a small application, say to the turbine in a wind generator, the efficiency may increase several times.

Rare earths — which are not really rare at all — are found in conjunction with thorium, often in phosphate mining. When the world gets serious about the rare earths supply, it has to get serious about thorium, especially in the United States.The Thorium Energy Alliance would like to see thorium put into a national stockpile, so that it is available when the pendulum in reactor design swings to thorium, and that becomes the future.

Can the 17 rare earth elements become the thorium reactor’s enabler? Some devoutly believe so. — For the InsideSources news service.

Thorium vs uranium is less important than liquid vs solid fuel. Joseph Lassiter, a professor at the Harvard Business School makes the critical observation that rich countries can do what they want; poor(er) countries do what they must. In coming decades, the vast majority of CO2 will be emitted by developing countries powering their growth. (Lassiter’s numbers are shocking. (See them athttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jGHTON5vvoQ&feature=youtu.be)
Unless an economically attractive form of nuclear power is demonstrated quickly, China and India will burn an immense amount coal. Molten-salt reactors (MSRs) are the only known candidate for this role. They can burn thorium or uranium, including existing nuclear waste. MSRs are profoundly safer than the pressurized-water reactors (PWRs) we use today. In particular, they preclude both of the phenomena constituting the Fukushima disaster, meltdown and hydrogen explosions. They cannot melt, and they don’t employ water (the source of explosive hydrogen). In an emergency, they simply cool to a frozen stop — with no human involvement; they are “walkaway safe”.
They compete successfully with both gas- and coal-fueled power plants. Dramatically greater burnup and reduced fuel-preparation make them less expensive to operate, while greater intrinsic safety and operation at atmospheric pressure make them less expensive to build.
Fortunately, the Chinese are pursuing MSRs aggressively. Our government has been scandalously unhelpful.
Art Williams, PhD

It is perfectly consistent and appropriate with your other statements that you must rely on an economics professor for your so-called “expertise.”

“Dramatically greater burnup and reduced fuel-preparation make them less expensive to operate”

That remains purely a long-standing, wishful hypothesis; by no means an historical fact, despite considerable government spending in this area. You also forgot to mention the lowered-efficiency/added-costs of that “greater burn-up.”

“the only known candidate for this role” …. “known?” .. my ass – known compared to what? equivocating, weasel words.

White House Chronicle on Social

There is disquiet in the soul of America. It has been expressed night after night on the streets of more than 100 towns and cities. That number of urban sites, with all those tens of thousands of people, are a cry from the hurting heart of America — yes, over the death of George Floyd, […]

A plow breaks up the soil, turns it over. If seed is put down, that sprouts along with any other seed that happens to be there, weeds and other wild plants. The new normal will be a plowed field where all sorts of innovations will spring forth. It will be a time of innovation, creativity […]

Snapshots. That’s what we have of the United States as we emerge tentative and fraught from lockdown. We don’t have the whole picture, just snapshots of this and that. Some of the snapshots are encouraging: The air is clearer, crime is down and a collective spirit is apparent in many places. Others are more disturbing: […]

A study envisioning how societies might address the complexities of the COVID-19 pandemic, undertaken by more than 70 leaders in innovation from around the world, is out. It is the largest, nongovernmental study on the virus, and it paints a picture of a world recalibrated by it — with a heavy dependence on data in […]